Writes Rhonda Garelick, in "About That Giant Kim Kardashian in Times Square/The seamless, poreless, sanitized effigy of a capitalist titan was a startling piece of marketing for Skims" (NYT).
1. That last sentence — "This structure was not... " — is a doozy. Have I ever written "doozy" on this blog? Yes! And I've written it in the context of a long sentence that needed diagramming. So now, here's another item for the annals of Things I Asked Grok: "Diagram this sentence...."
2. "Interiority" — You might remember just last month I was asking "What kind of people use the word 'interiority'?" Encountering the word in a NYT article (about Dylan Mulvaney), I searched my blog archive and extracted the history of the word "interiority" on this blog. There were 5 earlier appearances, all of them in quotes, never used by me. One day I'll use it!
3. This post gets my "big and small" tag — which is, regular readers may know, my favorite tag. I am amused by absurd and radical size variations.
4. The NYT writer is doing something I've seen a lot of over the years — crediting a woman for doing something other than what you might think she's doing: selling her sexuality.
पोस्ट्स
६१ टिप्पण्या:
Capitalism is an economy of retained earnings in a democratically regulated market.
Kim Kardashian is paradoxically the prime example of someone who's famous for doing nothing -- upon which she's built a staggering sales empire, and is therefore famous for doing something. A hell of a lot, actually.
She may well be the first woman to earn a billion dollars through her own entrepreneurial efforts.
I am not sure that diagramming that sentence helps it very much, the phrase "but rather a very faithful recreation of the workings of Ms. Kardashian’s empire" is not supported by the rest of the sentence which seems to be describing KK's body and her work ethic in relation to it. The phrase seems to be saying that her body is her empire. But that's not right, she does a lot of work to make her empire work outside of the gym. I think it's a garbage sentence, and by making it that long and ornamenting it so much, the writer hid its essential flaw from herself. Maybe it should have said "foundation" rather than "workings" but even that is kind of a slight to KK's work in building her business. Lots of people have worked out at the gym and sculpted great bodies, and never made a penny off of it.
There are onlyfans chicks racing each other in a mad dash to see how many men they can screw in a day. Until Kim tries for the coveted 1500 dudes-in-a-day title, she is soooo twenty-teens. Come on Kim get with the times.
Made me think of the drive-in movie "Attack of the 50 Foot Woman."
Rhonda Saltlick should find a line of work more suited to her abilities.
If they hadn't told us that the effigy was modeled on Kardashian, would anybody have made the connection that it was her? No. The NYT is doing quite a lot of fabulist promoting for her too, which is the secret to the success of all these people: A cooperative and fawning media. They would be nothing without it. But more importantly: What did they do to get it?
William Gibson has written very perceptively about this phenomenon.
They stuck that sentence together with JB Weld. I'd just throw it out and start over. How involved were KK's publicists with the project and this published item that keeps us up to date with the arts in the City?
Always be closing. Product is product.
Not into the Kardashians and their strange self-importance and cult.
Will never purchase a product from any of them.
“ Until Kim tries for the coveted 1500 dudes-in-a-day title,”
That would be about 58 seconds each. Unless you twist the definition to allow 3 at a time.
mezzrow said, "They stuck that sentence together with JB Weld."
So is Kim Kardashian.
As someone who has overused ellipses in the past—now I overuse the em dash—I feel like at least one of hers in this article falls completely flat. It's like all of those great editors we heard tell about in the past are gone.
Josephbleau said, "That would be about 58 seconds each. Unless you twist the definition to allow 3 at a time."
Using Bill Clinton's definition, yes it would be 58 seconds each. Kim can do it though, I know she can unseat that Australian hussy. Come on Kim you're a trooper. Do it for US.
USA! USA! USA!
The things I miss out on by not living in New York City! Thank goodness the publicists for the Kardashian Empire have cachet with the Times so we get all the Kardashian News That is Fit to Print!
I think that the whole article is a hot mess, even throwing in "interiority" is a desperate bid for a glossy sheen of sophistication —after all, even the position of her arms somewhat depicts her feelings, oops, I mean her "interiority."
I know, I know, comma splice in that last comment.
Ann, I believe you are developing an Interiority Complex.
While Rhonda drones on and on and on... Men look and this and think "nice tits". I'm a woman but Jesus, what drivel. I'm more sympathetic to the male response.
YouTube: You look like a good Joe
Let me know when they fill her with helium and run her down Fifth Avenue on Thanksgiving, right between Garfield and Snoopy.
She may well be the first woman to earn a billion dollars through her own entrepreneurial efforts.
I believe Taylor Swift has already eclipsed that mark.
Ad for Times Square.
Probably people with an inferiority complex. The same people who would gawk with gay amusement at a balloon in its baby suit.
A few days ago, Plastic Fantastic Lover. Now a Bombastic Rubber Lubber.
Kim may be a skank, but she’s not a ho. She has been in some type of committed relationship with all the men she’s been known to have had sex with.
Now is this love gonna get up off the ground
Is this love gonna get up off the ground
I need a fifty-foot woman to wrap these arms around
Is this love gonna get up off the ground
'Cause I'm a full-grown man
And I'm looking for a big love
Yes, I'm a full-grown man
And I'm looking for a big love, big love
Big Love, by Little Village
“[Having sex with 1,500 men in a day] would be about 58 seconds each.”
They say men are from Mars. And women are from Venus, where the day is 5,832 hours long. Any woman shooting for the title should do so on her home planet.
I believe Taylor Swift has already eclipsed that mark.
Difficult to measure precisely, hence my qualification, but the best estimates are that Kardashian was a billionaire by 2021 and Swift by 2023.
Inflated sense of self.
Rocco said, "She has been in some type of committed relationship with all the men she’s been known to have had sex with."
In the 21st century, the term "committed" is fungible. The term "ho" is also fungible. I'm not saying Kim's a gold-digger, but she ain't messing with no broke...
In other news; Ruth Marcus has quit the WaPo because Bezos spiked her latest column about how Bezos is a piece of shit because he wants to broaden the range of opinion on the WaPo opinions page.
'Men look and this and think "nice tits".'
Uh, no. There are a lot of different ways for tits to be nice, but those aren't. Maybe it's better from the back.
It's a comeback. In the video she has cum on her back. - Parks and Recreation blooper reel
I'm sorry. Kim Kardashian couldn't sell me a glass of water in the middle of the Sahara Desert----but that doesn't mean that there are not those who would buy her hype.
Grok, fashion me an inflated egg in the shape of a masculine gender Kardashian female, a second, Gemini, a twin, and deadname her Alexa. NOW let me gawk at him in gay parade with Perplexity and navel gazing. Hold the Guac. Add salsa.
Wholly Grokamole, that's a first-order forcing of climate change where it is conventional. Now show me a big pizza pie and hold the anchovies. Chaotic. Idiotic. A fermenting apple.
The art of seduction has evolved with liberal license in public production of social progress.
Also, someone should ask her what the carbon footprint of this art installation is (and of the corresponding promotions of it), and what she has done to counteract that.
I had previously never thought of breasts as threatening. Not only are they extremely large - I estimate individually at least the size of the person's head - but appear to be under immense pressure and about to explode. Them is some doozies!
Kim pulls her balloon(s) out of the closet in a gay parade and there is a consensus of yawns. Shuck and blah.
“4. The NYT writer is doing something I’ve seen a lot over the years - crediting a woman for doing something other than what you might think she’s doing: selling her sexuality.”
Wrong. ‘The Soup’ with Joel McHale introduced her regularly as “Kim Kardashian is famous for having a big butt and a sex tape” back in 2007. She got her *break* by using sex. And that “big butt” don’t signal anything *but* sex.
She’s business-savvy, but she “earned” her start.
who's famous for doing nothing -- upon which she's built a staggering sales empire, and is therefore famous for doing something. A hell of a lot, actually
Getting people to look is definitely not nothing, yes. I get to write I agree with the New York Times! re: credit for selling her sexuality. Keep in mind though the sex tape and the TV show are not nothing. People were/are thrown off that she didn’t take the usual routes of actor or sports star to product endorsement. She’s the Mercury astronaut of influencers… or maybe Laika if you so choose…
Kim may be a skank, but she’s not a ho
A ho... hole... black hole... whore h/t NAACP, an urbane perplexity. Get a trope.
Seamless? The armpits look pretty seamy.
"selling her sexuality". I'm filing a WDTEM grievance. What does that even mean? By convention, one can "sell sex", meaning, perform sexual acts for money. But it is not even clear what "her sexuality" is, let alone how she might sell it, or to whom. Maybe the EEOC could weigh on on this. It is illegal to discriminate in hiring on the basis of sex, except when it quite evidently isn't. For example, strippers, male or female. Hooters waitresses. Actors and actresses. AOC. Does that mean that those persons are "selling their sexuality"?
Between the "interiority" and the last sentence, I thought to myself, "Tell me you majored in English or Literature at Yale without telling me you majored in English or Literature at Yale."
I looked her up. BA in Comparative Literature and PhD in French, both from Yale.
I've heard of blow-up sex dolls, but this is ridiculous.
So, Kardashians are female?
52 comments and not a singe large/size of/small joke.
I'm increasingly disappointed in You People.
Balloon Kim has a large diktat the size of a small diktat!
"Ned, Ned Ryerson?"
"Watch out for that first step. It's a doozy!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI60ALeeu54
RSM, re "committed":
The phrase "been known to" is doing a lot of work there, too.
She is the founding director of the Interdisciplinary Institute for Public Humanities at Hofstra University, where she is also the John Cranford Adams Distinguished Professor of Literature.
Our elites are bankrupt.
Rabel said...
“52 comments and not a singe large/size of/small joke.
I'm increasingly disappointed in You People.
It was a large wait the size of a small wait.
Balloon Kim's ass is not proportionately large enough to match KK's really big butt.
OK, if Grok can diagram sentences, I am going to figure out how to use it. Diagramming sentences is great fun. It is the best way to teach students to write, and diagramming poetry is the best way to teach students how poetry works and plays with language.
Somehow, I can't think of a way to link this to an enormous blow-up doll featuring Kim Kardashian's netherparts.
I hope she's not in front of Snoopy in the Thanksgiving Day Parade. Also, really poor use of the word diktat by the silly Times writer.
The lifelike giant Kim Kardashian is made out of plastic, just like Kim herself.
You can see just about everything in the billboards, jumbotrons, and neon signs of Times Square. Why this thing should attract any attention at all is hard to say. There is no need to explain why people don't take notice of some random object in Times Square. What would need to be explained is if they do stop and stare and think about something.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा
Comments older than 2 days are always moderated. Newer comments may be unmoderated, but are still subject to a spam filter and may take a few hours to get released. Thanks for your contributions and your patience.